nationfandomcom-20200223-history
User talk:Semyon/RLC election system
This is interesting, I loik it but I want some time to consider it but I shall get back to you. (I pwomis) Hoffmann KunarianTALK 22:26, May 18, 2015 (UTC) :Ith it a pinkie pwomith tho'? :o --Semyon 08:25, May 19, 2015 (UTC) Elections need to change over time, there are changes to the influence certain groups have on the RLC. Give me a minute and I'll pull up the different periods and the changes throughout these periods. Hoffmann KunarianTALK 22:33, May 18, 2015 (UTC) How can you just "pull up" those? They're not agreed on yet. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 22:34, May 18, 2015 (UTC) Time, I know you don't think so, but Lovia has a history already and the RLC and the form it took has been described several times across it. And no, we are not going to change things retroactively to suit you. Hoffmann KunarianTALK 23:12, May 18, 2015 (UTC) : :o I'm pro RLC though, just contra already having all these periods decided. —TimeMaster (talk • ) 23:25, May 18, 2015 (UTC) :: They aren't already decided, the general framework is already there in our written history we just need to flesh it out properly and create the details. For instance despite everything we don't really have any idea, apart from Semyon's RLC page, how many members would be on the RLC. And that's just one of the many details we need to iron out and make clear. The things I have put below are from our current history and are to ensure we maintain consistency across the wiki history wise. Hoffmann KunarianTALK 00:03, May 19, 2015 (UTC) First things first the Prime Minister should never be directly elected, for consistency as much as for not adding things that have never been referenced to before. Secondly here are the different phases of the RLC according to our history and what kind of RLC we need in each phase: *1936-1938 - RLC created, States rule the roost but Sylvania particularly and other larger states are massively powerful in terms of representatives, aim is to resolve conflict mainly so it doesn't do much legislating, elected members didn't come into it. *1938-1942 - States are still incredibly powerful and do most of the legislating and such, the RLC is definitely made up of appointees of the States, with a lot more of a slant in favour of increasing the power of smaller states as Queen Lucy increased their representation, no elections yet, wait for it... *1942-1955 - More legislating occurred, states lose some power concerning legislation, democratically elected representatives were introduced to the RLC by Gilbert T. Brand, there is a debate needed for what kind of compromise Brand as a centralist and the states would have made for the election system for these representatives, appointed and elected representatives would probably be equal in amount (or maybe more elected) as this was considered a high point in democracy. *Arthur III's early RLC **1956-1962 - Arthur III is an authoritarian king and dramatically reduced the amount of elected members, although there were some, the King became much more powerful over the RLC and probably appointed a large amount of members, States have no involvement anymore (suggesting no state based elections to the RLC) apart from a few appointments of members (although they should appoint half or just less than half of the members because of the effect they have later in time). **1963-1971 - a continuation of Arthur's RLC however possibly with Arthur taking advice from Bairn over people to appoint, this period is transitional if anything. **1971-1981 - still continuing, probably with Arthur letting Prime Ministers appoint members via him. *1981-2002 - At some point more members become elected, no more than half, then the RLC and Arthur finally agree to establish the Congress for 2002 to be fully elected (bar the King of course) in 2003 and end the RLC This is based on our current history and the early lack of democracy is explainable considered fine by people because democracy is done on a state by state basis. When the democracy is pulled back by Arthur this is because of his attitude towards governance, very hands on in the first years of his reign and with the intent of bringing the States to heel. Further the Lovian people were vulnerable and accepted his actions because they from their point of view got better governance than before, when the famines struck. Please ask questions, but I seriously think that our history is more nuanced than the takaviki one form of election throughout the RLC's entire history. Further the nuance and form of the RLC has already been partly described in our history, we just need to fill in the gaps and write up official pages. Hoffmann KunarianTALK 23:12, May 18, 2015 (UTC) I'll also lay out my proposals for the history in a bit. Hoffmann KunarianTALK 23:14, May 18, 2015 (UTC) I was mainly trying to design the most corrupt system possible. :o I agree direct PM elections are not really feasible, except maybe in the last few years. And I also agree the system would have evolved over time. --Semyon 08:09, May 19, 2015 (UTC) :First of all, you do win the prize for the most corrupt system. Secondly I don't think that direct PM elections would be feasible at all simply because we've never had them in Lovia. :o I'm in the middle of moving house but when I can I'll share my proposals for the actual structure and change over time (as in details not just the outline fluff I found on the wiki that I posted above). Hoffmann KunarianTALK 14:54, May 19, 2015 (UTC)